DECIPHER: Decisions on the Risks and Benefits of Geoengineering the Climate (2019-2020)
Geoengineering is the large-scale modification of the Earth’s systems to address climate change. It includes a range of speculative approaches to change the Earth’s radiative balance through solar radiation management or by extraction of greenhouse gases directly from the atmosphere – strategies that may pose both benefits and risks.
Geoengineering has never been tested beyond a limited pilot scale, raising uncertainty about the cost, effectiveness and indirect impacts of these technologies. The approaches have profound risks of negative impacts to the ozone layer, regional precipitation patterns, ecosystems, agriculture and the global climate. Along with ethical and distributional concerns, there are also challenges related to discouraging mitigation, international governance and the risk of international conflict. However, if the cost is low and the effectiveness is high, then geoengineering may be a necessary component of a climate change risk management portfolio that keeps impacts below dangerous levels.
The overall goal of DECIPHER is to improve the holistic understanding of decisions regarding health and environmental risks. In its third year, DECIPHER will conduct a multifaceted analysis of geoengineering as one possibly effective but also risky strategy to address climate change.
The primary goal of this Bass Connections project is to support a broadly considered projection of what consequences may occur as a result of geoengineering. Team members will reflect on how to vet decisions to implement or not to implement geoengineering, and to what extent and through what strategies geoengineering should be implemented or regulated, including comparison of alternative governance approaches.
To achieve this, the project team will examine a series of risk-based decision scenarios involving geoengineering technologies, considered from a variety of vantage points; this includes multiple stakeholder groups and disciplinary domains, notably with inclusion of humanist fields alongside technical ones. Each scenario will be evaluated by interdisciplinary subteams of three to four people to assess what is known, what risk-risk or risk-benefit trade-offs are implicitly being made, the role of knowledge and narrative in shaping a broad array of stakeholder viewpoints and ultimately how each decision might be improved. Multiple stakeholder perspectives will be addressed for each case study, including those of the federal government, business, advocacy groups, news media, research and the general public. Subteams will then produce a storytelling project (e.g., a podcast, documentary, zine, video) that outlines the holistic story of a decision scenario of their choice.
Assessment reports on economic, legal, ethical, political and environmental impacts of geoengineering; policy briefs; opinion pieces; poster and oral presentations; videos
Ideally, the project team will consist of 15 undergraduate students and 5 graduate students from diverse disciplines and research interests. Students from all schools at Duke are encouraged to apply.
Leadership and mentorship opportunities will be built into the design of the team and subteams, and the process of moving through the case studies will impart a range of skills, including the application of multiple disciplinary methods, facilitation of group discussion, teaching, interviewing and critical analysis. Students will also have the opportunity to interview or engage with key stakeholders in the geoengineering community.
Summer background reading may be assigned to ensure that all team members begin the project with a shared knowledge base.
Fall 2019 – Spring 2020
- Fall 2019: Project introduction and boot camp (6 weeks); form subteams and begin analyses of geoengineering technologies; pro/con debate on geoengineering (stakeholder role-play exercise #1)
- Spring 2020: Mini project boot camp (3 weeks); exploration of international implications of geoengineering (stakeholder role-play exercise #2); international governance workshop; preparation of policy briefs, poster and oral presentations
Independent study credit available for fall and spring semesters
See earlier related team, DECIPHER: Case Studies in Drinking Water Quality (2018-2019).
Image: Save Planet Earth, by Özgür Mülazımoğlu, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0
/faculty/staff Team Members
Mark Borsuk, Pratt School of Engineering-Civil & Environmental Engineering*
Kathleen Burns, Trinity-English-Ph.D. Student*
Tyler Felgenhauer, Pratt School of Engineering-Civil & Environmental Engineering-Postdoc*
Christine Ogilvie Hendren, Pratt School of Engineering-Civil & Environmental Engineering*
Varun Mallampalli, Pratt School of Engineering-Civil & Environmental Engineering-Ph.D. Student*
William Pizer, Sanford School of Public Policy
Drew Shindell, Nicholas School of the Environment-Earth and Ocean Sciences
Jonathan Wiener, Duke Law*